Talk:Revolutionary Communist Party (UK, 1978)

What was the point of Bobrayner's re-edit?

The previous contributor introduced a quote from the Judge in the ITN libel case, and a quote from the editor of the organization's journal. Hardly evidence of bias - rather the opposite! Jane Bowen (talk) 15:54, 25 March 2014 (UTC) Jane Bowen (talk) 15:58, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Sources 'warning' box

The box at the front seems a bit pointless.It is a good thing, surely, that the article draws on the stated positions of the organization, rather than making them up.Jane Bowen (talk) 15:52, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Developing the article

Can I remind people that this is an online encyclopedia and that all entries whould be factual and non PoV. I've started to redress this. Apistogramma 20:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

In Cruel Britannia: Reports on the sinister and the preposterous (200), Nick Cohen claims that the RCP held reactionary views on Aids -- you know, the "gay plague" mindset -- and that they refused to support the NHS (on the basis that it was a tool of the capitalist state, presumably) or giving money to charity (on the basis that it prolongs capitalism). I don't know if there is any evidence to support this, because Cohen gives no reference to text sources. Likewise, there are rumours (not related by Cohen) that the RCP were an MI5 set-up or worked for MI5. This might just be jealous bitching, but I do hope its true 'cause it would make a good story. -- james.

The RCP did have a contentious position on AIDS which could seem to be homophobic but waasn't. Rather they were happy that others thought that of them. Dunnno bout the HNS but it doesn't seem likely. Rumours about groups being stuffed with state agents are usually tosh. I mean who would se the RCP as a threat? Gobshites is all they were.

I wasn't suggesting that the RCP were a threat -- more that there must be some other reason (than sectarianism) that there are/were so many far-left groups in the UK. Thing is, the RCP seemed awfully well-funded for a way-out political sect. I read an ad in one of their booklets from the 80's that claimed the summer camp would be in a big hotel w/ swimming pools and that. Anyhoo, god knows what the spooks get up to... -- james

I don't know that they were that rich, in the early '90s their summer camp was at a caravan park somewhere on the east coast, Norfolk I think. They got their money from members contributing 10% of their earnings.

It is true that they believed the welfare state within a capitalist society to be revisionist. I don't think they were M15, I certainly wasn't! but they were gobshites. Jane

No, probably not MI5 - though they might as well have been. that furedi bloke still into entryism? i read an article by him in the daily express! - james

If you look at patterns of police work in the US, for example, the sending in of informers seems much more likely. Also, the RCP's cell structure and high security would have acted against the ease of police monitoring. Considering the middle-class nature of the group's supporters, and the highly readable material they produced, plus the agressive selling tactics, I don't think the group's finding is that surprising. --Duncan 19:43, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

The RCP published a theoretical journal, Confrontation, which commenced in the summer of 1986. Its still worth reading, I must say. At this point, the RCP had as its declared aim the formation of a vanguard of active workers, which would lay the foundations for a mass party -- it was this vision of a leninist party that, they claimed, caused them to split from the RCG. The fact that they took an oppositional stance to much of the recieved wisdom of the British left -- calling for a ballot during the great miners strike of 1984-5, breaking with the strategy of entryism into the Labour party -- later led them to become contrarian libertarians when they abandoned Marxism. I think the impact of the counterrevolutions in Eastern Europe and the USSR allowed the RCP leadership to wind up the party. One ex-RCP member I spoke to seemed to think that the Spiked! set are still Marxists, but though Mike Hume may refer to himself as a libertarian marxist in the pages of the Times, I doubt very much if they have any serious political commitment. -- mr 9

Clean-up category removed

I took the liberty of removing the 'clean-up' tag, after adding a number of printed and internet references, removing dead links, changing the iffy picture, adding some internal wikipedia links, adding some picture, adding some sections, and, I hope, accomodating the criticisms of the RCP with the proper weight. Please feel free to correct or add errors.Murray McDonald (talk) 22:07, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

attitude to working class

The page did read 'the early ideas of the RCP had it that the working class of the UK were not a revolutionary force for change - being acutely contaminated by what they described as bourgeois ideology'. That might stand up as an interpretation of the RCP's approach from a given point of view, but it is not the stated aims of the RCP, which I have substituted. Also, it is not true that the RCP's early approach to the working class rejected a direct appeal to the working class as pointless, so I have changed that to rejected a direct appeal to the state, which was their stated viewpoint. Later on, when the party was wound up, it was on the basis of an analysis that the working class had ceased to be a revolutionary force, so it does not really make sense of the shift in position to insist that it was held from the outset. Murray McDonald (talk) 11:54, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Trotskyist?

Could anyone who knows more about them clarify this point? I always thought they described themselves as Leninist if anything (or at least they should have done, based on what I read of their stuff years ago). --Nickhh 09:39, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

In the sence that Lenin's supporters divided between Trotskyist and marxist-leninist, they are Trotskyist. They are certainly of trotskyist origin. Their approach to the USSR was rooted in the theories of Burham and Shachtman, leading US Trotskyists. --Duncan 12:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Thenextstep.jpg

Image:Thenextstep.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 21:42, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

'British occupation of Northern Ireland'?

I have changed a sentence from 'British occupation of Northern Ireland' to 'British rule in Northern Ireland' as I feel it is POV to say the former. I cannot find anywhere else on Wikipedia where Northern Ireland is referred to as being occupied. I also can't find evidence that the RCP used this term. The definition of an occupation is 'The control of a country or region by a foreign army.' Although the republican minority in Northern Ireland consider the British to be foreign, the Unionist majority see Northern Ireland as part of the UK, as does the British government, the UN, the EU and (these days) the Republic of Ireland. --Philip Stevens (talk) 17:28, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Conflict with far right

I am not sure that the correction to that section is correct. The RCPBML offices were surely in Seven Sisters Road, where they had a bookshop (New Era?). The RCP did indeed have an office in Wandsworth at the time. The RCP was involved in a number of fights with the National Front and the BNP in pursuit of its policy of 'workers defence against racist attacks'. Lecomber says he was going to bomb the RCP, not the RCPB ML. I suggest we change the section back to how it was, unless there are any objections. ~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Murray McDonald (talk • contribs) 09:21, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Anyone remember the "science of despair"

When I was a student in Manchester in the early 90s the RCP ran a series of lectures opposing chaos theory, called (as far as I remember) "the science of despair", which many people took as proof that they had finally lost the plot. Unfortunately I can't find any reference to this on the net. Does anyone know anything about it? HairyDan (talk) 21:36, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

RCP Bike Rider

Who was that feller in London, used to turn up on the doorstep after dark, about six-foot tall, big bike and black leathers, and he never took his helmet off! Hardcore geezer when you've had a reef or two. Used to bring the paper over, and once, a book about the chartists. Don't think he ever saw that again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.248.10 (talk) 12:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

US embassy occupation

The Guardian article referenced in reference 19 does not refer to Campaign Against Militarism or Somalis, and only mentions nonspecific "activists" who were ejected from the building. The reference doesn't support the claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.124.214 (talk) 02:16, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

New Labour mileu

The article states - in common with its pro-RCP propagandist tone:

“When the organisation re-thought its outlook in 1991, it adopted a number of positions that put it at odds with the New Labour milieu:”

One can only assume that the author endorses Gerry Healy’s conception of Marxism as ‘an exact, predictive, science’ in that the RCP were able to take a position on ‘New Labour’ a full three years before Tony Blair proclaimed its existence at the 1994 Labour Party conference. 2A02:C7C:362A:E200:B0AA:2C0E:8A55:2085 (talk) 10:08, 2 June 2023 (UTC)